Prepulse inhibition and the call alert in emergency medical services
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In emergency medical services, paramedics are informed of an emergency call by a high-intensity acoustic alarm called the "call alert." Sudden, loud sounds like the call alert may cause a startle response and be experienced as aversive. Studies have identified an association between the call alert and adverse health effects in first responders; conceivably, these adverse health effects might be reduced by modifying the call alert to blunt its startling and aversive properties. Here, we assessed whether the call alert causes a startle response and whether its startling and aversive properties are reduced when the call alert is preceded by a weak acoustic "prepulse," a process referred to as "prepulse inhibition" (PPI). Paramedics (n = 50; 34M:13F:3 not reported; ages 20-68) were exposed to four call alerts (two with and two without a prepulse) in counterbalanced order. Responses were measured using electromyography (measuring blink amplitude), visual analog scales (quantifying perceived call alert intensity and aversiveness), and an electrocardiogram (assessing heart rate). Paramedics responded to the call alert with a startle reflex blink and an increased heart rate. Acoustic prepulses significantly reduced the amplitude of the call alert-induced startle blink, the perceived sound intensity, and the perceived "dislike" of the call alert. These findings confirm that the call alert is associated with an acoustic startle response in paramedics; adding a prepulse to the call alert can reduce its startling and aversive properties. Conceivably, such reductions might also diminish adverse health effects associated with the call alert in first responders.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".